I have a feeling that new joiners on this site, just like many other sites, tend to make fools of themselves during their first few posts, because they rush in without first reading others' contributions and understanding the "culture".

Yes well, this is precisely what I'm about to do right now. It was either this, or having to burden Venomous with another profile creation attempt, as my account will probably expire in a few hours if I don't post something.

Now that the justifications are out of the way,

Hi, I'm SuperEgo.

I'm glad to meet you. Long story short, I'm a hermit who chooses to spend his time in solitude. Reading, writing and thinking. Most social gatherings make me uneasy, and with time I have come to accept and enjoy spending time alone with nothing but my book, brain, and notepad.. This is one thing that I believe makes me a Social Deviant.

I'm not familiar with any of the members in this community yet, except Jackie, whom I've known for a very long time, although I doubt anyone can get enough of this great individual.

Now, regarding this forum, I think it's a really intriguing place, and I wonder which kind of people are attracted to it and eventually join it. "Social Deviancy" sounded to me at first as some sort of hangout for individuals with a sexual paraphilia, but now I believe that the definition is more along the lines of "individuality in the face of vast conformity".

That being said, I WISH I was more of a social deviant. It's unfortunate, but there are many areas of individuality I would like to express, yet keep repressing because of social scrutiny.

I wish I could always hang out with a person dressed in World War II gas-mask gear similar to that of my display picture, because I believe it will express a deep, dark need I have inside. Yet my social brain laughs at this idea, and pushes it into a dark crevice where most of my "social deviancy" lay.

So anyways, I hope to get to see some TRUE individuality and self-expression on this site, and maybe become inspired to morph into the ideal image of myself that I constantly imagine becoming.

Hey dude. Welcome on board. It's nice to see someone new around here. I'm sure everyone will love you. And if they don't, well, at least I will.

I'm very glad to see someone who also beliefs in freedom of expression. The hurdles new members have to overcome to join SD will probably be fixed one day. Until that time, new members are the most prized thing we can get. So your arrival will surely be cherished by all.

I must say, you have a really nice avatar. What a good pick. Reminds me of professional insect exterminators. Hmmm... we do have some vermin here that needs some poison. Anyway, great you joined us. I'm looking forward to have some discussions with a more open-minded person.

We can't really speak of a paradigm here. Let me unveil the sort history of SD.

Social deviancy was created by a guy who was banned from a forum for no apparent reason. He got so pissed he decided to create his own forum so he wouldn't be bothered with that kind of censorship anymore. Hence Social Deviancy was born. A handful of people joined over the years, and posted boring stuff no one would ever want to read even if they were really bored.
Over time, these members abandoned the site, until just one or two remained. Then I joined, and almost gave the site's creator a heart attack by this sudden shocking action. There hadn't been a new member in many years. I didn't post particularly unsettling things right away, until some time ago I made a few posts that were not so well received. People started getting angry, they foamed at their mouth, they slammed on their keyboard from pure rage. One of them, I suspect, even committed suicide.(can you confirm that, spirochete?) Suddenly things started to get a little more serious, a little more deviant, and that was something this site had never seen before.

What happened is I used something called freedom of speech. A new concept for the members we had at that time. Which bring me to your question. What exactly is it? Freedom of expression means everyone must allow everyone to write and post anything they desire, which means allowing that which you do not approve of. This includes taking another member's personal pictures from social media, photoshopping them to make it look like they are having sex with a goat, and then posting it here. Some forum owners would call the police if that happened, but here on SD no one is going to make a fuss about it. Okay, maybe some will, but you know what I mean.

Basically, so long as it's not illegal you're allowed to post it. Most forums will see you banned if you aren't being an asskissing, politically correct two-faced lair. You do not have to worry about that here; vicious scumbaggery will win you brownie point everywhere else, but not on SD. Just do what I do, and be yourself.

SuperEgo wrote:Oh, I thought you were the poison, and I was just the mascot. Wait, it's not even Halloween yet bro.

No no no, I am the inspiration. Everyone here is in awe by the magnificent posts I make. They are even reluctant to reply because they feel unworthy compared to me; this is of course totally understandable, because it is hard to rise up to the high level of my greatness. But I am a forgiving, patient, understanding guy who welcomes everyone. I simply encourage people to try a bit harder and become a little less incompetent.

You too can become a source of inspiration. And I think we really need that.

Hello SuperEgo. Sorry about this belated and half-assed reply. I'm sure from my eagerness to get you posting, you expected more from me. I advise against indulging in this feeling. You will only end up disappointed. =)

Jackie really did say it better than I likely could. All the information there is some form of what we're all about. I'm going to try and rally the troops one more time tonight, spread the word about the new blood. After that, you're on your own.

You and Jackie seem to know one another already, so feel free to dive in, check out his articles and topics and just don't feel shy about posting whatever comes to mind after reading the threads.

Jackie wrote:
Social deviancy was created by a guy who was banned from a forum for no apparent reason. He got so pissed he decided to create his own forum so he wouldn't be bothered with that kind of censorship anymore. Hence Social Deviancy was born. A handful of people joined over the years, and posted boring stuff no one would ever want to read even if they were really bored.
Over time, these members abandoned the site, until just one or two remained. Then I joined, and almost gave the site's creator a heart attack by this sudden shocking action. There hadn't been a new member in many years. I didn't post particularly unsettling things right away, until some time ago I made a few posts that were not so well received. People started getting angry, they foamed at their mouth, they slammed on their keyboard from pure rage. One of them, I suspect, even committed suicide.(can you confirm that, spirochete?) Suddenly things started to get a little more serious, a little more deviant, and that was something this site had never seen before.

I would have been very upset if I were banned from a forum for no apparent reason as well. This member wouldn't happen to be Venomous, would it?

Jackie wrote:
Freedom of expression means everyone must allow everyone to write and post anything they desire, which means allowing that which you do not approve of

If that is the case, then I can definitely agree with freedom of expression. There seems to be a problem of etiquette and consideration for others, though, which can be antithetical to freedom of speech. For example, one could write post upon post, disparaging my mother, despite having had no previous contact with her. It is nothing more than words on a screen, yet it can be irritating for the targeted individual. In this case, being myself.
But the question is, should my irritation serve as a hindrance to others from doing what they want? After all, in this case, nobody is really getting hurt. Emotionally hurt, maybe. But there is no threat to my existence here. So I am inclined to say that one should have the right to speak ill of my mother as much as they please.
(Btw, I think that physical threats are a red line that should not be crossed, because I believe in Epicurus' idea of the "social contract", whereby people collectively agree to not harm one another, so that individuals will get to enjoy the great pleasures in life. Achievement, love, academia, etc..)

There is an air of unsettlement regarding the issue of freedom of speech. It's controversial, to say the least. And I believe that both the proponents and opponents of freedom of speech are equally correct..

Jackie wrote:
Basically, so long as it's not illegal you're allowed to post it.

Oh, what are the illegal types of posts? Forgive me if there is a post on SD detailing this issue, as I have not searched the forum yet.
And I wonder, does this mean that SD is not as free as one might expect?

seajayjay wrote:
So OP is an Introvert!

If you're taking the popular, non-Jungian definition, then yes. Some people may argue that I am wasting my existence by spending it cocooned at home. But this begs the question, what is so inherently valuable about being "outside"?
Don't you think so?

Glad to meet you, and Hellmark, and spirochete.
Venomous, I didn't have much of an expectation actually. So it's fine. I am not here to change you, or anyone else, by any means.

One more thing..
Jackie is clearly the dark horse in this forum. But why is he not as appreciated as one might expect him to be, considering that he is a proponent of precisely what this site espouses?

Freedom of speech and expression does not mean no-one can oppose or disagree with you. It actually means the opposite, as the opposer has the freedom to do so as they please. On top of that, if someone is being an asshole, dickhead, fool or cunt, it gives everyone the freedom to point it out.

Jackie is definitely not a dark horse on the forum, they just think they are some kind of renegade for using free speech, like it's a magical unexpected weapon, somehow blowing the minds of this forum, despite it being the VERY REASON for its existence.

Also, Jackie jumps to baseless assumptions and conclusions. Examples are:
-I committed suicide
-They are an inspiration
-I am a girl
-Everyone is in awe of them
-Pointing out logical fallacies and stupid arguments equals rage

They are welcome to think that, but they are many shades of wrong. I would also like to point out Jackie's reluctance to reply, as they accuse others of this (due to being in such awe of his dumbass posts). I have replied to a number of topics that they have written or commented on, and many months have gone by without replies.

Basically, Jackie is very much fully inserted up their own ass, and I doubt this will change.

SuperEgo wrote:I would have been very upset if I were banned from a forum for no apparent reason as well. This member wouldn't happen to be Venomous, would it?

How did you guess?

SuperEgo wrote:There is an air of unsettlement regarding the issue of freedom of speech. It's controversial, to say the least. And I believe that both the proponents and opponents of freedom of speech are equally correct..

Hm. I don't agree. Free speech is invaluable. Without it, a large population suffers from oppression and abuse. Progress would be stifled, and we would all be miserable. The reasons to restrict or censor speech are many, but a lot of the time it's to have control over someone else. And I don't like that one bit. Another common reason is so people don't hurt each other's feelings, like the example you mentioned. Still, I have always found this kind of laughable. Without censored speech you can get nasty treatment, indeed, but free speech or not, these sort of things happen regardless. It's not at all difficult to bully someone even if there's censorship. No, quite the contrary... that censorship would inhibit the victim to speak out. You can count on it that those who abuse others know very well what they're doing and how far they can push it within the confines of a certain legal or social justice system, and that gives them their power.

The only real problem I have with free speech, if we talk about online forums, is the risk that it degrades a discussion board to the level of the lowest common denominator. Without censorship, everyone is allowed to post whatever crap they please. I have seen a few truly uncensored forums, and it wasn't pretty. There's no deep discussions, no one actually bothers to read each others posts, there's just the ever present nasty attitude of a large userbase who doesn't actually believe in free speech or in thinking before posting, or in considering why someone has a certain conviction. No one ever asks questions like “why do you believe that?” or “can you explain your views?” Virtually all users make extremely low effort posts of a single sentence that no one in their right mind cares about. It's just horrible and such a waste of potential. And I fear that one day Social Deviancy will share that fate. I'm certainly not hoping so, but if our current userbase is any indication for the future, it's not looking good. But I'm trying to stay positive, especially now you're here.

SuperEgo wrote:Btw, I think that physical threats are a red line that should not be crossed, because I believe in Epicurus' idea of the "social contract", whereby people collectively agree to not harm one another, so that individuals will get to enjoy the great pleasures in life. Achievement, love, academia, etc..

Yet again I have to disagree. I have had many, many, many physical treats on various sites. I don't have a problem with it. There is of course a difference between talking about the act, and actually doing it. It's easy to tell most people don't really intend on hurting or killing me. For those who were in fact serious, I think they should be free to do so. I'm not opposed to murder. Shocking, eh?

SuperEgo wrote:Oh, what are the illegal types of posts? Forgive me if there is a post on SD detailing this issue, as I have not searched the forum yet.
And I wonder, does this mean that SD is not as free as one might expect?

I don't know the full extend of everything that may be considered illegal to post, however, the law we have to abide by is that of the United States. I believe this means we can't post child pornography, we're not allowed to post any death treats, we can't write about creating plans of a terrorist attack of any sort, and we can't write about other things we would want to do that could break the law, like planning a kidnapping or blowing up some building or robbing a bank, etc. I'm probably missing a few things, but you probably know what I mean.

As far as our freedom goes, it's about as good as it gets. I've searched far and wide for forums that support true free speech, but every time I saw a small link at the bottom of the page with a 'terms of use' or a 'policy' that led to an enormous list of crap you're not allowed to say. Even most sites which didn't have any policy were still censored. With all that in mind, I would answer “no” to your question. Social Deviancy is actually more free than one might expect.

Jackie wrote:I don't know the full extend of everything that may be considered illegal to post, however, the law we have to abide by is that of the United States. I believe this means we can't post child pornography, we're not allowed to post any death treats, we can't write about creating plans of a terrorist attack of any sort, and we can't write about other things we would want to do that could break the law, like planning a kidnapping or blowing up some building or robbing a bank, etc. I'm probably missing a few things, but you probably know what I mean.

As far as our freedom goes, it's about as good as it gets. I've searched far and wide for forums that support true free speech, but every time I saw a small link at the bottom of the page with a 'terms of use' or a 'policy' that led to an enormous list of crap you're not allowed to say. Even most sites which didn't have any policy were still censored. With all that in mind, I would answer “no” to your question. Social Deviancy is actually more free than one might expect.

Jackie basically has the gist of things. I want to add though, that such censorship of "illegal in the USA" concepts extend only to protecting my own ass from ending up in prison. The only things I will pro-actively censor are things that could fuck me up simply for having on my forum, such as kiddy porn. Everything else, such as, to use Jackie's example, discussions about kidnapping or robbing a bank, I will not censor, but if forced to by law I will co-operate with The Man in as far as I have to to not be liable myself. However, being a completely public forum, there really is no way I could aid the law in any investigations since they can see publicly everything that you or I can, with the possible exception of your IP address. If you plan on talking about criminal acts or similar, I recommend you log into the forum using a VPN or other IP hiding technology so that I won't be put in a position where I have to choose between disclosing your IP or going to prison myself. Other than that though, I won't censor any post that a regular member will make. This does not extend to bot spam, which I delete on sight. For further clarification, please refer to this thread here.

So I guess, with that said, this forum is probably even more free speech inclined than either of you thought. How about that eh? =)

Thank you for clarifying the philosophy of freedom of speech Jackie. I was reserved due to the whole "hurting other people's feelings" thing, but you made a good point:

Jackie Wrote:
Another common reason is so people don't hurt each other's feelings, like the example you mentioned. Still, I have always found this kind of laughable. Without censored speech you can get nasty treatment, indeed, but free speech or not, these sort of things happen regardless. It's not at all difficult to bully someone even if there's censorship

But there is a problem here.
Your argument is basically: Since freedom of speech is not the only source of hurt for others, then banning freedom of speech would be silly since we would only be tackling one of the sources of hurt.

The way I see it, there are only two options that have consistency within them:
1) Limit freedom of speech, and everything else that hurts others.
2) Neither limit freedom of speech, nor anything else that hurts others.

And then the following question arises:
Which society would we want to live in? Society 1, or society 2?

Venomous, what is the most shocking/"illegal" thread that has been posted on Social Deviancy so far?

SuperEgo wrote:Your argument is basically: Since freedom of speech is not the only source of hurt for others, then banning freedom of speech would be silly since we would only be tackling one of the sources of hurt.

No, you're turning it around; we have censored speech because people in general have apparently agreed upon a restriction of speech on the basis that if it weren't for this restriction, everyone is getting their feelings hurt. So I said that was a poor reason to prohibit free speech because it doesn't do what it was supposed to be doing in the first place.

The real reason to prohibit freedom of speech is political. It's great for suppressing everyone. I think that is the issue here. The opponents of free speech are lairs who claim to prevent emotional suffering when actually they are using it shape the world to their idea of right and wrong, and they don't care how many people have to suffer to make this happen.

SuperEgo wrote:The way I see it, there are only two options that have consistency within them:
1) Limit freedom of speech, and everything else that hurts others.
2) Neither limit freedom of speech, nor anything else that hurts others.

And then the following question arises:
Which society would we want to live in? Society 1, or society 2?

I'll go with number 2. Number 1 is not possible anyway, because suffering is an intrinsic part of life. It's unavoidable, and no one can realistically always prevent themselves from causing suffering to another. I'd rather have a more realistic society, that takes this into account, and also tries to prevent suffering on a large scale by being sensible about the choices that are being made. It doesn't have to be black and white. Besides, I know that in a society without free speech, I definitely suffer. And I'm not the only one...

Venomous wrote:If you plan on talking about criminal acts or similar, I recommend you log into the forum using a VPN or other IP hiding technology so that I won't be put in a position where I have to choose between disclosing your IP or going to prison myself. Other than that though, I won't censor any post that a regular member will make. This does not extend to bot spam, which I delete on sight. For further clarification, please refer to this thread here.

So I guess, with that said, this forum is probably even more free speech inclined than either of you thought. How about that eh? =)

Yeah, it's pretty neat. I especially like how you even give us criminal advice. Here's a smiley for you, man. Hehe. (&#12484;)

Last edited by Jackie on Tue May 19, 2015 9:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

SuperEgo wrote:The way I see it, there are only two options that have consistency within them:
1) Limit freedom of speech, and everything else that hurts others.
2) Neither limit freedom of speech, nor anything else that hurts others.

And then the following question arises:
Which society would we want to live in? Society 1, or society 2?

No question for me. #2. Take all the warning labels off everything and let the morons all kill themselves. A Darwinian society where only the people who are least moderately intelligent survive.

Jackie wrote:Yeah, it's pretty neat. I especially like how you even give us criminal advice. Here's a smiley for you, man. Hehe. (&#12484;)

What criminal advice? I don't know what you're talking about! Virtual private networks and anonymous browsers are perfectly legal and used by governments and law enforcement every day. There's nothing illegal about them. =)